No. That's not how it works. If I make a claim, it's on me to provide evidence and prove that claim.
If he made all of these "racist" and "sexist" comments, someone would actually have cited what he said verbatim. Then I can look at the evidence and say, "yea, that dude is a racist."
Examples:
In 1947 he said, "blacks ain't shyt, they deserve to burn in hell."
In 1959 he said, "man, I hate Indians and Chinese."
In '79 he claimed, "Jewish people are a scourge and they should be cleansed."
And in 1988 he said, "Boy, the Northern Irish deserve The Troubles. Hope the English blow them off the map."
If he's such a racist, why do I have to Google it, search through a bunch of articles, and piece everything together like a puzzle? Why am I looking through articles that allude to some comments that he made that could be interpreted as this or that?
Stop telling me he's a racist and tell me what he actually said. Or shut the fukk up and just admit you're parroting what you heard and don't know what you're talking about.